Network Working Group Adrian Farrel
Internet Draft Old Dog Consulting
Category: Informational
Expiration Date: August 2007 February 2007
Codepoint Registry for The Flags Field in the Resource Reservation
Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Session Attribute Object
draft-ietf-mpls-iana-rsvp-session-flags-01.txt
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract
This document provides instructions to IANA for the creation of a new
codepoint registry for the flags field in the Session Attribute
object of the Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineeging
(RSVP-TE) signaling messages used in Multiprotocol Label Switching
(MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) signaling.
A. Farrel [Page 1]
draft-ietf-mpls-iana-rsvp-session-flags-01.txt February 2007
1. Introduction
The Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) [RFC2205] has been extended
as Rsvp for Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for use in Multiprotocol
Label Switching (MPLS) signaling [RFC3209] and Generalized MPLS
(GMPLS) [RFC3473].
[RFC3209] introduced a new signaling object, the Session Attribute
object, that is carried on the RSVP Path message. The Session
Attribute object contains an eight-bit field of flags.
The original specification of RSVP-TE assigned uses to three of
these bit flags. Subsequent MPLS and GMPLS RFCs have assigned further
flags.
There is a need for a codepoint registry to track the use of the bit
flags in this field, to ensure that bits are not assigned more than
once, and to define the procedures by which such bits may be
assigned.
This document lists the current bit usage and provides information
for IANA to create a new registry. This document does not define the
uses of specific bits - definitive procedures for the use of the
bits can be found in the referenced RFCs.
2. Existing Usage
2.1. RFC 3209
[RFC3209] defines the use of three bits as follows:
0x01 Local protection desired
0x02 Label recording desired
0x04 SE Style desired
2.2. RFC 4090
[RFC4090] defines the use of two bits as follows:
0x08 Bandwidth protection desired
0x10 Node protection desired
2.3. RFC 4736
[RFC4736] defines the use of one bit as follows:
0x20 Path re-evaluation request
A. Farrel [Page 2]
draft-ietf-mpls-iana-rsvp-session-flags-01.txt February 2007
3. Security Considerations
This informational document exists purely to create an IANA registry.
Such registries help to protect the IETF process against Denial of
Service attacks.
Otherwise there are no security considerations for this document.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to create a new codepoint registry as follows.
The new registry should be placed under the "RSVP-TE Parameters"
branch of the tree.
The new registry should be termed "Session Attribute Object Flags."
Flags from this registry may only be assigned by IETF consensus
[RFC2434].
The registry should reference the flags already defined as described
in section 2 of this document.
5. Acknowledgements
Thanks to JP Vasseur, Bill Fenner and Thomas Narten for reviewing
this document.
6. References
6.1 Normative References
[RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S. and
S. Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) --
Version 1, Functional Specification", RFC 2205,
September 1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing
an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC
2434, October 1998.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan,
V. and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling - Resource ReserVation
Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions",
RFC 3473, January 2003.
A. Farrel [Page 3]
draft-ietf-mpls-iana-rsvp-session-flags-01.txt February 2007
6.2 Informative References
[RFC4090] Pan, P., Swallow, G., and Atlas, A., "Fast Reroute
Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC 4090,
May 2005.
[RFC4736] Vasseur, JP., Ikejiri, Y., and Zhang, R.,
"Reoptimization of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
Traffic Engineering (TE) Loosely Routed Label Switched
Path (LSP)", RFC 4736, November 2006.
7. Author's Address
Adrian Farrel
Old Dog Consulting
Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk
8. Intellectual Property Consideration
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ipr@ietf.org.
9. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
A. Farrel [Page 4]
draft-ietf-mpls-iana-rsvp-session-flags-01.txt February 2007
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
A. Farrel [Page 5]